The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-08-27
FRANK @. HADDOOK SPEAKS.


pher of the late Rev. George G. Had
dock, in which, addressing the Editor he
writes:
thank you for the honor you confer in
offering TO publish extracts from the manu-
script volume "Hell not Eternal" by my
father. am, however, compelled to decline.
My father held the views of that volume only
few months, after which he returned to the
belief that some souls must be lost. To
show the character of the man, 1 used extracts
from the volume in my book. To publish
more extracts, or the volume as a whole, or
to go beyond the idea of illustrating his life
and character, would be to do what he would
not, am certain, desire, because it would be
publishing as his belief what he did not be-
lieve.
Now, permit me to observe. You singu-
larry rely upon my testimony to show that
my father was Universalist, yet you reject
my testimony that he was not at death, and
before, Universalist. You say. Vol. 4, No.
%, article "Rev. G. O.. Haddock's Religious
Opinions" close of first paragraph: "The
single modification which the biographer
notes will pass for what it is worth" That
Is all you say or give on and of the testimony
offer in the book that he rejected Univers-
alism at last. Probably few of your readers
have or will read the book. You quote lib
orally to show his Universalism, and slur
over the testimony which makes those quota
tions almost, if not entirely, useless to your
paper. You make your point, therefore, un-
fairly. 1t is this kind of method which, as
freely as the doctrine, puts Universalists in
bad odor. For this reason your article is
unfair and unjust.
Permit me also to say that my father did
not believe the doctrine of the volume from
a period few months after the writing of
it. His sermons show this. His preaching
showed it. His hearers testify unequivocally.
You are pleased to accept my evidence in
part; accept it in full.
should not regret it had he believed in
Universalism. l have nothing to gain in
withholding the truth, or CLOSING it over.
Let US have the truth. l am, sir, yours very
respectfully, FRANK G. HADDocK.
We sincerely regret that Mr.. Haddock
declines our proposition for the publica-
ton Of further extracts from his fathers
manuscript volume, entitled, "Hell not
Eternal" In the biography, page 300,
after giving several pages of surprising ex-
tracts from that manuscript, denouncing
the belief in an endless hell and equally
explicit in affirming Universslism, the
biographer says: "These sentences are
no more than statements. The argument
was long and exhaustive both in Scrip.
ture and in reason" 1t was this remark
that impelled the offer to print further
particulars. The statements we're so in
ciRive and comprehensive, SO emphatic in
repudiating the old belief and enthusiasts
tic in the advocacy of the new found
faith, that we we're anxious to survey the
argument OF the work in full. Valuable
as are the extracts given in the biogra-
ply for which we must here thank Mr..
Frank Haddock, -and distinctly as they
set forth the fathers change of faith, the
'1ong and exhaustive argument" from
the Scripture and reason, would be still
|
valuable manuscript cannot be further
unfolded. Mr. Haddock may be certain
that Universalists are not alone interest.
ed in this matter. There Is a wide IN
terest abroad in regard to the subject.
There are many Methodists, for exam
pie, who would like to understand
exactly the grounds on which the elder
Haddock, after having been engaged, as
he himself says, "for more than twenty
years in the work of the Christian pastor
ate in an orthodox church." relinquish-
ed the belief in endless punishment and
became secret convert to the faith that
all men would be ultimately saved.
We are convinced that the son could,
just now, do nothing that would better
serve his fathers memory than to make
known the precise grounds on which he
was forced, in recent years, to give up his
belief in the Methodist doctrine, and to
embrace the views of the Universalist
church. Inasmuch, however, as MIR.
Frank Haddock is the custodian of his
fathers papers, and interprets his flial
duty as contrary to all this, there is no
recourse. Our regrets stand, neverthe-
less; and we may add, that we believe the
son in this makes serious mistake
that having made known this change of
faith, he is leaving his duty unfnish-
ed in not revealing the argument by
which the conclusions were reached and
sustained.
Mr.. Haddock does not deny, the reader
will notice, the Universalism of the man.
uscript; that is patent and clear to all the
world. The SOD, however, says that
Hsddock "held the views of that volume
only few months, after which he re-
turred to the belief that some souls
must be lost" He makes substantially
the same statements in the biography
page BID, and explains them in one of
the most rhetorical portions of the book.
1t was in regard to this declaration that
we remarked: "The single modification
which the biographer notes will pass for
what it is worth" We can only say the
same now in reference to that, and to
what he adds in the above communica-
ton. 1t should be remembered that here
totore we have been dealing exclusively
with Haddock's opinions as revealed by